E-typing for nematodes: an assessment of type specimen use by nematode taxonomists with a summary of types deposited in the Smithsonian Nematode Collection

No metrics data to plot.

The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.

The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.

The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on
BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an
institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform
automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the
Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a
favorably uniform low price.

We assessed 301 taxonomic papers published in nine journals between 1999-2011 to determine the use of type specimens and to evaluate the habitat focus and the number of new species described per year. A total of ca 100 new nematode species were described every year, primarily from terrestrial habitats. Two-thirds were terrestrial, 16% were aquatic and the remaining 9% were animal-parasitic nematodes. Only 2.5% of the taxonomic literature reported a comparative study of type material for making a decision on the identity of the target taxon. The overwhelming majority (i.e., 97.5%) relied only on literature comparisons. Our closer scrutiny of the 61 papers revealed a number of shared problems: a third stated that inadequacy of original descriptions, or unavailability/inaccessibility of type specimens had hindered them from unequivocally determining the identity of their species. Fourteen percent reported a discrepancy between the text descriptions and the illustrations, and a tenth revealed the absence of designated types for taxa relevant to their work. A similar number indicated deterioration of types to be a reason for either making wrong conclusions in previous descriptions, or for rendering their descriptions incomplete. We argue for E-typing of nematodes as a solution to enhance the future accessibility of type specimens. We stress the need for a concerted effort between museum curators, nematological journals and nematological societies to address the problem and thereby to forge a brighter future for the science.

11. International Code of Zoological Nomenclature( 1999). International code of zoological nomenclature adopted by the International Union of Biological Resources, 4th edition.London, UK, International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature.